From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
Cc: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>,
konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, stephen@networkplumber.org,
dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org,
Vladimir Medvedkin <vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] app/testpmd: fix l4 sw csum over multi segments
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 10:29:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YXuw0I/02IcYEAPX@platinum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D86C6A@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 01:29:52PM +0200, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ferruh Yigit
> > Sent: Wednesday, 27 October 2021 12.49
> >
> > On 10/20/2021 11:12 AM, Xiaoyun Li wrote:
> > > In csum forwarding mode, software UDP/TCP csum calculation only takes
> > > the first segment into account while using the whole packet length so
> > > the calculation will read invalid memory region with multi-segments
> > > packets and will get wrong value.
> > > This patch fixes this issue.
> > >
> > > Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")
> > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > v3:
> > > * Use rte_raw_cksum() for multi-segs case instead of copying the
> > whole
> > > * packet.
> > > v2:
> > > * Use static stack memory instead of dynamic allocating in datapath
> > > ---
> > > app/test-pmd/csumonly.c | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > ---
> > > 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c b/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
> > > index 090797318a..f3e60eb3c3 100644
> > > --- a/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
> > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
> > > @@ -91,12 +91,41 @@ struct simple_gre_hdr {
> > > } __rte_packed;
> > >
> > > static uint16_t
> > > -get_udptcp_checksum(void *l3_hdr, void *l4_hdr, uint16_t ethertype)
> > > +get_udptcp_checksum(void *l3_hdr, struct rte_mbuf *m, uint16_t
> > l4_off,
> > > + uint16_t ethertype)
> > > {
> > > + uint16_t off = l4_off;
> > > + uint32_t cksum = 0;
> > > + char *buf;
> > > +
> > > + while (m != NULL) {
> > > + buf = rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(m, char *, off);
> > > + cksum += rte_raw_cksum(buf, m->data_len - off);
> > > + off = 0;
> > > + m = m->next;
> > > + }
> > > if (ethertype == _htons(RTE_ETHER_TYPE_IPV4))
> > > - return rte_ipv4_udptcp_cksum(l3_hdr, l4_hdr);
> > > + cksum += rte_ipv4_phdr_cksum(l3_hdr, 0);
> > > else /* assume ethertype == RTE_ETHER_TYPE_IPV6 */
> > > - return rte_ipv6_udptcp_cksum(l3_hdr, l4_hdr);
> > > + cksum += rte_ipv6_phdr_cksum(l3_hdr, 0);
> > > +
> >
> > Hi Xiaoyun,
> >
> > I can see 'rte_ipv[46]_udptcp_cksum()' is not taking multi segment mbuf
> > into account, so this fix is required,
> > but instead of implementing this logic into testpmd, what do you think
> > to have APIs to support multi segment mbufs?
> > This way other applications also benefit from it and we don't need to
> > maintain ip4/6 checksum related code in testpmd.
>
> +1
>
> Also, there is no need to implement the multi-segment raw checksum loop in test-pmd.
>
> You can use the multi-segment raw checksum function in the net library instead:
> http://code.dpdk.org/dpdk/latest/source/lib/net/rte_ip.h#L224
+1
We can have mbuf variants of udptcp checksum functions:
rte_ipv4_udptcp_cksum()
rte_ipv4_udptcp_cksum_verify()
rte_ipv6_udptcp_cksum()
rte_ipv6_udptcp_cksum_verify()
Adding a "_mbuf" suffix would be consistent with rte_raw_cksum_mbuf().
Olivier
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-29 8:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-15 5:13 [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] " Xiaoyun Li
2021-10-15 8:09 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] " David Marchand
2021-10-18 2:02 ` Li, Xiaoyun
2021-10-18 2:16 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] " Xiaoyun Li
2021-10-18 3:00 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] " Stephen Hemminger
2021-10-18 3:16 ` Li, Xiaoyun
2021-10-18 4:40 ` Li, Xiaoyun
2021-10-18 10:15 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-10-19 1:54 ` Li, Xiaoyun
2021-10-20 10:12 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v3] " Xiaoyun Li
2021-10-27 10:48 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-10-27 11:29 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] " Morten Brørup
2021-10-29 8:29 ` Olivier Matz [this message]
2021-12-03 11:31 ` Li, Xiaoyun
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YXuw0I/02IcYEAPX@platinum \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com \
--cc=xiaoyun.li@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).